This opinion outlines the Supreme Court’s decision of a 2002 case involving the Ontario Police Department and its officers’ privacy rights as they pertain to electronic communication. The City provided pagers for sending and receiving text messages to the Ontario Police Department. The City’s “contract with its service provider…provided for a monthly limit on the number of characters each pager could send or receive, and specified that usage exceeding that number would result in an additional fee.” After several officers, including Quon, exceeded the limit, the OPD’s chief, Scharf, “sought to determine whether the existing limit was too low…or, conversely, whether the overages were for personal messages.” Upon the service provider’s procurement of transcripts, “it was discovered that many of Quon’s messages were not work related, and some were sexually explicit.” Quon was disciplined after the transcripts showed that “few of his on-duty messages related to police business.” Shortly after, Quon filed suit, claiming that his Fourth Amendment rights and the federal Stored Communications Act were violated. The court determined that since Scharf used the audit legitimately, to determine “the efficacy of existing character limits,” he did not violate the Fourth Amendment.